You're correct. The state, for example, inUse is tracked differently
Derrick
On Jun 17, 2010, at 8:34 PM, Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:09 PM, Andrew Deason
> <adeason@sinenomine.net> wrote:
> ...
>>> My current feeling is that it would be great if we could ship both
>>> fileservers, side by side, with different executable names - but I
>>> haven't looked at any of the code to see how complex this would be
>>> to
>>> achieve.
>>>> I haven't actually tried this... but at least from the perspective of
>> the end result binaries, this seems simple. (the build process will
>> be
>> annoyingly longer, though, at least).
>>>> 1.5 bosserver always understands the 'fs' and 'dafs' bnodes, I'm
>> pretty
>> sure, regardless of whether DAFS is enabled or not. So you can have
>> an
>> 'fs' bnode pointing at the non-DAFS binaries, and a 'dafs' bnode
>> pointing at the DAFS ones. You should be able to switch between
>> DAFS and
>> non-DAFS just by stopping and starting the fs and dafs bnodes.
>>>> A caveat here is the set of volserver, salvager, and salvageserver
> binaries: you need different ones for DAFS than for non-DAFS (iirc --
> it's been a few years since I looked at that code). That's not a
> problem, of course; I'm just pointing that out as some may not be
> aware of that. Andrew, Tom,etc, if that's not the case now, feel
> free to clarify.
>> Thanks,
> Steven
> _______________________________________________
> OpenAFS-devel mailing list
>OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org>https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel